🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has ended in clear failure.

It campaigned for over 36 months for the privilege to host the largest global environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted many thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next November.

This won't occur. Instead, the summit known as Cop31 is headed to the resort city of the Turkish coastal city, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Letdown and Mixed Messages

The result will be a significant disappointment to numerous individuals who had hoped organizing the environmental gathering could help speed up Australia's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring global attention to the survival crisis facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that resulted in defeat has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials truly desired the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the local and global press saying the government was withdrawing.

This contrasted with the message being conveyed at the climate negotiations in the city of Belem, where the Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, had just stated the country was "fully committed to success".

Ambiguous backing is a recurring problem for the hosting proposal. Although the minister supported it, other high-level figures of the administration have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and sometimes completely against.

There is little sign the prime minister has viewed UN climate conferences a important focus. He has missed one since becoming prime minister in 2022. We'll never know, but some will wonder if more could have been done to secure the hosting rights.

A Different Perspective

That's one interpretation. But there is another way to look at it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the decision on Wednesday night may, ironically, have been the most favorable outcome available.

The minister outlined on that day an novel agreement that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the Cop president, organizer and effective event manager, and the Australian delegation – Bowen himself – would assume a role as "president of negotiations", wrangling nearly 200 countries on the matters that the nations actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together combat the climate crisis.

Additionally, there would be a greater focus on the Pacific, including a lead-up event on an island nation.

Reasons for Doubt

There are plenty of grounds for scepticism. Turkey and Australia do not have a strong partnership. Specific aspects of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it begins.

But it could also be a way to salvage something useful from what looked like an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

The Turkish government is widely seen in the international community as having been hellbent on causing havoc in the UN climate process. This framework is designed to operate by consensus. Usually, that means if there are several nations in the race those with weaker backing either bow out voluntarily, or a deal is privately arranged to encourage them to exit the race.

Turkey plainly had less support than the joint Pacific proposal to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's venue had supported the southern pitch.

However, uniquely, Turkey declined to withdraw. The word "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not only by local commentators.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a reflection of the divided international landscape. Without US participation under the former president, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to stare down the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with some cover.

President Erdoğan is considered aligned with Vladimir Putin. Several nations feared a summit obstructed from the leadership if his administration led the negotiations. Germany did not want to have to organize an unprepared Cop31 at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the stalemate wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A resolution was necessary. International frameworks is flawed and often disconcerting to observe, but multilateral action has empirically made a difference in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a creative idea that maintains progress when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding reasonable concerns of the Australian government over its hypocritical support for expanding carbon-based exports, climate activists who attend UN conferences see Bowen as a positive influence in the talks. He has been requested to lead discussion groups at multiple summits he has attended.

This matters. While some have dismissed the role of a "president of negotiations", specialists from research centers and veteran observers at climate talks assert it is pivotal to their positive outcome.

"Each effective summit has been shaped by a president directing proceedings who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. This occurred in the German capital in 1995, in the Mexican resort in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. We saw the opposite in the Danish city in 2009," he says. "It's the most important role at the conference other than making sure that people have food."

Remaining Concerns

Multiple unresolved issues. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. How, if at all, can the Australian government do to stop a restriction on NGO participation by the host government?

Perhaps not much. However, this doesn't prevent this deal looking like the best chance possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the global community. It's worth a try.